Guest November 10, 2013 Share November 10, 2013 ----- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horatio November 10, 2013 Share November 10, 2013 To be honest, I would use the term 'thought form' in place of tulpa there, but that's just me. One Tulpa: Name: Yuki Physical appearance: Similar to Winry from Fullmetal Alchemist Date of Creation: 16th September, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caduceus November 10, 2013 Share November 10, 2013 Depends, are we influental enough to change the word's meaning? It still expresses an entity created through concentration or collective effort, possibly an explanation for the supernatural, and not necessarily a companion. In the "Magic and Mystery in Tibet" book that is one of our few sources, there's a a description of a Yidam practice where the student is ordered to basically tulpaforce until the tulpa becomes visible, starts to speak etc. Its purpose is to realize the illusionary nature of such experiences and if the student fails, he is left with a tulpa for life. Yidam is much closer to a phantom friend than some spooky stuff. We're not creating tutelary deities that protect Buddhists though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
left blank November 10, 2013 Share November 10, 2013 First off, I'm relieved he didn't say "tulpae" at any point during the video. Secondly, I appreciate both his considerable accuracy and gestalt perspective. He managed to connect all of the phenomenon and provide a respectably thorough explanation for their (likely) psychological origins. ...it seems as though he's going a little broad on the definition of tulpa compared to what we're all aiming to create. What do you guys think? He really only presents the aspect of tulpa that relates to folklore and the Jungian collective unconscious, but his explanation is valid. I don't personally perceive a clear distinction between a "tulpa" and "thought-form," other than the accompanying Tibetan Buddhist history of the former. This community seems to have borrowed the word as a label for a(n arguably common) psychological phenomenon I would call "adult* imaginary companions". Depends, are we influental enough to change the word's meaning? It still expresses an entity created through concentration or collective effort, possibly an explanation for the supernatural, and not necessarily a companion. I agree with this question, and add: Why would you want to change it? For convenience sake? Of course, some of this has been discussed at length elsewhere (long, long ago). *Although, as I understand it, the majority of participants here are actually adolescents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.